Industry Concentration and Mutual Fund Performance
|
|
- Everett Strickland
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Industry Concentration and Mutual Fund Performance MARCIN KACPERCZYK CLEMENS SIALM LU ZHENG May 2006 Forthcoming: Journal of Investment Management ABSTRACT: We study the relation between the industry concentration and the performance of actively managed U.S. mutual funds from 1984 to Our results indicate that the most concentrated funds perform better after controlling for risk and style differences using factor-based performance measures. This finding suggests that investment ability is more evident among managers who hold portfolios concentrated in a few industries. Keywords: industry concentration; mutual fund performance; active portfolio management Kacperczyk is from the Sauder School of Business at the University of British Columbia. Sialm and Zheng are from the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan. We thank an anonymous referee for helpful suggestions. We acknowledge the financial support from Mitsui Life Center in acquiring the CDA/Spectrum data.
2 PRACTITIONER S DIGEST Evaluating and predicting mutual fund performance has for long attracted keen attention of practitioners. Investors buy actively managed funds hoping they will beat the market. Empirical evidence indicates that, on average, actively managed funds do not outperform passive benchmarks after deducting fund expenses. Still, some mutual fund managers might differ substantially in their investment abilities. In this study, we examine whether some fund managers create value by concentrating their portfolios in industries, in which they may have informational advantages. We develop a new measure of industry concentration, the Industry Concentration Index, to quantify the extent of portfolio concentration in ten broadly defined industries. Our analysis indicates that mutual funds differ substantially in their industry concentration and that concentrated funds tend to follow distinct investment styles. Managers of more concentrated funds overweigh growth and small-cap stocks, whereas managers of more diversified funds hold portfolios that closely resemble the total market portfolio. Most important, we find that more concentrated funds perform better after adjusting for risk and style differences using the three-factor model of Fama and French (1993) and the four-factor model of Carhart (1997). In sum, the evidence shows that some actively-managed fund managers are able to outperform passive benchmarks. 1
3 Wide diversification is only required when investors do not understand what they are doing. Warren Buffett Evaluating and predicting mutual fund performance has for long attracted keen attention of practitioners. At least two reasons can be responsible for such interest: First, a significant portion of household wealth is managed by mutual funds; Second, one can observe a steady growth of different funds in the marketplace. Investors buy actively managed funds hoping they will beat the market. Empirical evidence indicates that, on average, actively managed funds do not outperform passive benchmarks after deducting fund expenses. 1 Still, some mutual fund managers might differ substantially in their investment abilities. In this study, we examine whether some fund managers create value by concentrating their portfolios in industries, in which they may have informational advantages. Modern portfolio theory suggests that investors should widely diversify their holdings across industries to reduce their portfolios idiosyncratic risk. Fund managers, however, may want to hold concentrated portfolios if they believe some industries will outperform the overall market or if they have superior information to select profitable stocks in specific industries. 2 Consistent with this hypothesis, we would expect funds with skilled managers to hold more concentrated portfolios. 3 Mutual fund managers may also hold concentrated portfolios due to a potential conflict of interest between fund managers and investors. Several studies indicate that investors reward 1 For evidence on fund performance, see, for example, Jensen (1968), Grinblatt and Titman (1989), Gruber (1996), Daniel, Grinblatt, Titman, and Wermers (DGTW, 1997), Cohen, Coval, and Pástor (2004), Kacperczyk and Seru (2005), Mamaysky, Spiegel, and Zhang (2005). 2 Levy and Livingston (1995) show in a mean-variance framework that managers with superior information should hold a relatively concentrated portfolio. Van Nieuwerburgh and Veldkamp (2005) argue that optimal under-diversification arises because of increasing returns to scale in learning. 2
4 stellar performance with disproportionately high money inflows but do not penalize poor performance equivalently. 4 This behavior results in a convex option-like payoff profile for mutual funds. Consequently, some managers, especially those with lower investment abilities, may have an incentive to adopt volatile investment strategies to increase their chances of having extreme performance. Consistent with this hypothesis, funds pursuing such strategies would hold more concentrated portfolios, yet they would not necessarily have superior risk-adjusted performance. In this study, we develop a new measure of industry concentration -- the Industry Concentration Index -- to quantify the extent of portfolio concentration in ten broadly defined industries. This index is based on the difference between the industry weights of a specific portfolio and the industry weights of the total market portfolio. Using U.S. mutual fund data from 1984 to 2003, we construct portfolios of funds with different industry concentration levels. Our analysis indicates that mutual funds differ substantially in their industry concentration and that concentrated funds tend to follow distinct investment styles. Managers of more concentrated funds overweigh growth and small-cap stocks, whereas managers of more diversified funds hold portfolios that closely resemble the total market portfolio. We find that more concentrated funds perform better after adjusting for risk and style differences using the three-factor model of Fama and French (1993) and the four-factor model of Carhart (1997). Specifically, for the latter measure, we show that a portfolio including 5% of the most concentrated mutual funds yields an average abnormal return of 3.31% per year before deducting expenses and 1.85% per year after deducting expenses, whereas a similar portfolio 3 Two related studies by Coval and Moskowitz (1999, 2001) show that mutual funds exhibit a strong preference for investing in locally headquartered firms about which they appear to have informational advantages. 4 Numerous studies have called attention to the performance-flow relation, for example, Ippolito (1992), Gruber (1996), Chevalier and Ellison (1997), Nanda, Wang, and Zheng (2004). Zheng (1999) documents the smart money effect. 3
5 composed of the 5% least concentrated funds yields an average abnormal return of 0.41% before and -0.60% after expenses. 1 Data Our sample is an updated version of the data used in Kacperczyk, Sialm, and Zheng (2005) and covers the time period between 1984 and The main data set has been created by merging the CRSP Survivorship Bias Free Mutual Fund Database with the Thompson Financial CDA/Spectrum holdings database and the CRSP stock price data. The CRSP Mutual Fund Database includes information on fund returns, total net assets, different types of fees, investment objectives, and other fund characteristics. The CDA database provides stockholdings of mutual funds. The data are collected both from reports filed by mutual funds with the SEC and from voluntary fund reports. We also link each reported stockholding to the CRSP stock database. We start our matching process with a sample of all funds in the CRSP database. The focus of our analysis is on actively managed open-end domestic equity mutual funds, for which the holdings data are most complete and reliable. For that reason, we eliminate balanced, bond, money market, index, and international funds, as well as funds not invested primarily in equity securities. To gauge funds discretionary concentration decisions, we exclude sector funds, which constrain themselves in their choice of industry concentration. Since different share classes have the same holdings composition, we aggregate all the observations pertaining to different share classes into one fund level observation. 5 We also exclude funds which hold less than 10 stocks and those which in the previous month manage less than $5 million. With all the exclusions, our sample includes 2,339 distinct funds and 200,726 fundmonth observations. Due to the substantial growth in the mutual fund industry over the last 20 5 For most variables, we use a value-weighted average for the fund level observation. For fund age, we use the maximum of all share classes. 4
6 years, we have significantly more funds in the more recent years of our sample period. The specific number of funds ranges from 226 (January 1984) to 1,676 (April 2002). 2 Industry Concentration Index We define a measure of industry concentration -- the Industry Concentration Index -- based on the fund holdings. Specifically, we assign each stock held by a mutual fund to one of the ten industries as described in the Appendix. We define the mutual fund s Industry Concentration Index (ICI) at time t as the sum of the squared deviations of the value weights for each of the ten different industries held by the mutual fund, w j, t, relative to the industry weights of the total stock market, w j, t. 10 j= 1 ( ) 2 w w ICI = (1) t The Industry Concentration Index measures how much a mutual fund portfolio deviates from the market portfolio. This index is equal to zero if a mutual fund has exactly the same industry composition as the market portfolio and increases as a mutual fund becomes more concentrated in a few industries. The Industry Concentration Index is related to the Herfindahl Index, which is commonly used in industrial organization to measure the concentration of companies in an industry. The Industry Concentration Index can be thought of as a market-adjusted Herfindahl Index. We choose the Industry Concentration Index instead of the Herfindahl Index for two reasons. First, the industry weights of the total market portfolio vary over time. The Industry Concentration Index takes this variation into account by adjusting for the time-varying industry weights in the market portfolio. Second, a mutual fund can have a lower Herfindahl Index than the entire market portfolio if it is more equally invested in the different industries. The Industry Concentration j, t j, t 5
7 Index is not subject to this problem, because the market portfolio has the lowest possible index value of zero. Table 1 documents summary statistics for the Industry Concentration Index and other fund characteristics. The average actively managed mutual fund has an Industry Concentration Index of 7.32%. The Industry Concentration Index exhibits a significant cross-sectional variation. Concentrated funds may differ substantially from diversified funds in numerous characteristics such as size, age, managerial fees, loads, and turnover. To identify such patterns in the data, in each month we sort all funds into decile portfolios based on their ICI and calculate average fund characteristics across such deciles. On average, concentrated funds have higher turnover and higher expenses than diversified funds. For example, the most diversified portfolio exhibits an average turnover of 70% per year compared to the most concentrated portfolio whose turnover equals % per year. Likewise, concentrated funds are younger, hold fewer stocks, and have a lower value of assets under management. Specifically, funds in the most diversified portfolio on average hold 150 different stocks while funds in the most concentrated portfolio on average hold approximately 62 stocks. Table 1 Industry Concentration and Fund Characteristics. The average fund characteristics for different portfolios of mutual funds are reported for the period of 1984 to We divide the sample into deciles based on the lagged Industry Concentration Index, which is defined as ICI = (w F,i w M,i ) 2, where w F,i is the weight of the mutual fund holdings in industry i and w M,i is the weight of the market in industry i. Industry Concentration Index (in %) Number of Stocks Total Net Assets Age Turnover (in %) Expense Ratio (in %) All Funds Bottom Decile , nd Decile rd Decile th Decile th Decile th Decile th Decile th Decile th Decile Top Decile
8 3 Empirical Evidence In this section, we present the empirical results. First, we investigate the relation between industry concentration and fund performance using a portfolio approach. Subsequently, we focus on the size and the style of mutual funds to further explore the relation between industry concentration and fund performance. A. Portfolio Evidence To gauge the relative performance of funds with different concentration levels, we sort all funds into ten portfolios according to their Industry Concentration Index at the end of each month. For each decile portfolio, we compute the equally weighted average return for each month. Finally, we estimate abnormal returns for each decile using the monthly values. For this estimation, we use the performance information from all funds, including funds with short return histories, thus mitigating a potential selection bias. In estimating abnormal returns, we use the Fama and French (1993) three-factor model and the Carhart (1997) four-factor model to adjust for return differences due to style and risk factors as follows: R i,t R F, t = α i + β i,m (R M,t R F,t ) + β i,smb SMB t + β i,hml HML t + e i,t, (2) R i,t R F, t = α i + β i,m (R M,t R F,t ) + β i,smb SMB t + β i,hml HML t + β i,mom MOM t + e i,t, (3) where the dependent variable is the return on portfolio i in month t net of the risk-free rate, and the factor portfolios include the returns of three zero-investment strategies. In particular, the first factor, R Mt R Ft, denotes the excess return on the market portfolio over the risk-free rate, 6 the second factor, SMB, is the return difference between small and large capitalization stocks, the 6 The market return is calculated as the value-weighted return on all NYSE, AMEX, and NASDAQ stocks using the CRSP database. The monthly return of the one-month Treasury bill rate is obtained from Ibbotson Associates. 7
9 third factor, HML, is the return difference between high and low book-to-market stocks. 7 In the four-factor model, MOM is the return difference between stocks with high and low past returns. 8 The intercept of the model, α i, is the measure of abnormal performance. Figure 1 summarizes the results for the four-factor model defined in equation (3). We examine the factor-adjusted returns both before and after subtracting fund expense ratios. Looking at the returns before expenses enables us to better evaluate the investment ability of mutual fund managers, since managers with better skills may charge higher expenses to extract rents, consistent with the theory proposed by Berk and Green (2004). On the other hand, the returns after expenses are what matters to mutual fund investors. Figure 1 Abnormal Four-Factor Performance Before and After Expenses by Industry Concentration Monthly Abnormal Return Before Expenses Most Diversified Most Concentrated After Expenses Concentration Portfolios First, we examine in more detail the abnormal returns before deducting expenses. The most concentrated fund portfolios tend to have higher abnormal returns than the less concentrated 7 The size, the value, and the momentum factor returns were taken from Kenneth French s Web site 8 Moskowitz and Grinblatt (1999) document that momentum is stronger at an industry level. 8
10 portfolios. Consistent with the information hypothesis, the positive effect on performance shows up predominantly for funds with the most concentrated portfolios, that is, for those funds, which we would expect to have significant information advantages. The ranking of the concentration deciles for the abnormal returns after expenses is very similar to the one before expenses. The difference in the performance between the most concentrated and diversified funds narrows slightly if we study after-expense returns, because highly concentrated funds charge higher expenses than diversified funds. Table 2 summarizes the results for the four-factor model defined in equation (3). The abnormal returns are calculated using fund returns before subtracting fund expenses and are reported in the first column. The results indicate that the most concentrated fund portfolios tend to have higher abnormal returns than the less concentrated portfolios. Specifically, the most concentrated fund decile portfolio generates an abnormal return of 0.177% per month, while the most diversified fund decile portfolio generates an abnormal return of 0.015% per month. The abnormal return of the most concentrated portfolio is positive and statistically significant at the 10% significance level. In contrast, the abnormal return of the most diversified portfolio is not significantly different from zero. The difference in the monthly abnormal returns between the most and the least concentrated decile equals approximately 0.16% per month, which is statistically significant at the 10% level. The magnitude of the performance difference increases further if we compare the top and the bottom 5% of funds. Hence, the evidence indicates that the most concentrated funds perform better than diversified funds before deducting expenses. This finding is consistent with the information hypothesis, that the most concentrated portfolios have informational advantages. These advantages can be reflected in either superior stock selection, timing, or style selection abilities. 9 9 Kacperczyk, Sialm, and Zheng (2005) show for the sample of funds between 1984 and 1999 that concentrated funds have both better stock selection and market timing ability. 9
11 Table 2 Coefficient Estimates for the Carhart Factor Model. This table summarizes abnormal returns and the factor loadings using the Carhart (1997) four-factor model for different portfolios of mutual funds for the period of 1984 to The first column reports the four-factor abnormal returns, and the remaining four columns summarize the factor loadings using returns before expenses. We divide the sample of funds into deciles based on the lagged Industry Concentration Index, which is defined as ICI = (w F,i w M,i ) 2, where w F,i is the weight of the mutual fund holdings in industry i and w M,i is the weight of the market in industry i. The returns are expressed at a monthly frequency and the portfolios are rebalanced monthly. The standard errors of the regressions are given in parentheses. The table includes the differences in the abnormal returns along with their standard errors between the top and the bottom deciles, and the top and the bottom 5% of the sample. Alpha Market Beta Size Beta Value Beta Momentum Beta All Funds (0.046) 1.003*** (0.011) 0.180*** (0.014) (0.017) (0.010) Bottom 5% Diversified (0.026) 0.955*** (0.006) *** (0.008) 0.020** (0.010) * (0.006) Bottom Decile (0.025) 0.964*** (0.006) *** (0.008) 0.032*** (0.009) (0.005) 2 nd Decile (0.033) 0.969*** (0.008) (0.010) 0.060*** (0.012) (0.007) 3 rd Decile (0.041) 0.986*** (0.010) 0.103*** (0.012) 0.072*** (0.015) (0.009) 4 th Decile (0.044) 0.991*** (0.011) 0.149*** (0.015) 0.083*** (0.016) (0.009) 5 th Decile (0.046) 0.989*** (0.011) 0.182*** (0.014) 0.049*** (0.017) 0.019* (0.010) 6 th Decile (0.053) 0.996*** (0.013) 0.221*** (0.016) 0.040** (0.019) 0.032*** (0.011) 7 th Decile (0.062) 1.014*** (0.015) 0.254*** (0.019) 0.040* (0.022) (0.013) 8 th Decile (0.072) 1.025*** (0.018) 0.295*** (0.022) (0.026) (0.015) 9 th Decile (0.087) 1.053*** (0.021) 0.319*** (0.026) * (0.032) 0.033* (0.018) Top Decile 0.177* (0.096) 1.046*** (0.023) 0.366*** (0.029) *** (0.035) (0.020) Top 5% Concentrated 0.276** (0.096) 1.039*** (0.029) 0.348*** (0.036) *** (0.043) (0.025) Top Bottom Decile 0.162* 0.082*** 0.463*** *** (0.098) (0.024) Top Bottom 5% 0.242** 0.084*** (0.121) (0.029) *** 1% significance; ** 5% significance; * 10% significance (0.030) 0.478*** (0.037) (0.036) *** (0.044) (0.021) (0.026) 10
12 To further examine the risk and style characteristics of the decile portfolios, we report the factor loadings from the four-factor model using before-expense returns in the last four columns of Table 2. We observe that concentrated funds exhibit higher market betas than diversified funds. Concentrated funds also tend to hold small and growth companies, whereas diversified funds tend to hold large and value companies. However, concentrated funds do not exhibit more momentum in their returns than diversified funds. The inference about the style differences between concentrated and diversified portfolios is also affected by market conditions. If we exclude the last four years ( ) of the data (as in Table II of Kacperczyk, Sialm, and Zheng (2005)) which can be defined as a bear market followed by a recovery, we can observe that concentrated funds follow more momentum and size strategies. At the same time, they do not differ much in terms of their exposure to market risk. Nevertheless, the differences in fund performance between concentrated and diversified funds, as indicated by their comparable alphas, do not change. Therefore, we could argue that different funds adjust their trading strategies differently in response to changing market conditions, but the main conclusion holds: The more concentrated funds outperform the more diversified ones. 10 Mutual funds with different portfolio concentration differ in terms of their expense ratios. In particular, the average annual expenses range between 1.49% for the most concentrated funds and 1.02% for the most diversified funds, as indicated in Table 1. In Table 3, we assess the impact of fund expenses on the relation between concentration and performance. We report portfolios alphas estimated using both gross and net of expenses returns. 10 An interesting issue to consider could be an impact of the FD regulation on the concentration effect. Given that the regulation has possibly made an access to information more costly one could expect to see some impact on mutual fund concentration strategies. Since the sample size for the post-fd-regulation period is a mere 2-3 years we defer the formal tests of this hypothesis to future research. 11
13 Table 3 Abnormal Performance of Portfolio Concentration Portfolios. This table summarizes abnormal returns of the Fama-French three-factor model and the Carhart four-factor model for different portfolios of mutual funds for the period of 1984 to The first two columns report the abnormal returns estimated using fund returns before subtracting expense ratios, and the last two columns report the abnormal returns estimated using fund returns after subtracting expense ratios. We divide the sample of funds into deciles based on the lagged Industry Concentration Index, which is defined as ICI = (w F,i w M,i ) 2, where w F,i is the weight of the mutual fund holdings in industry i and w M,i is the weight of the market in industry i. The returns are expressed at a monthly frequency and the portfolios are rebalanced monthly. The standard errors of the regressions are given in parentheses. The table includes the differences in the abnormal returns along with their standard errors between the top and the bottom deciles, and the top and the bottom 5% of the sample. Abnormal Return (in % per month) Before Expenses After Expenses 3-Factor 4-Factor 3-Factor 4-Factor All Funds (0.045) (0.046) (0.045) * (0.046) Bottom 5% Diversified (0.026) (0.026) *** (0.026) * (0.026) Bottom Decile (0.025) (0.025) *** (0.025) *** (0.025) 2 nd Decile (0.032) (0.033) ** (0.032) ** (0.033) 3 rd Decile (0.040) (0.041) *** (0.040) *** (0.041) 4 th Decile (0.043) (0.044) ** (0.043) ** (0.044) 5 th Decile (0.045) (0.046) ** (0.045) ** (0.046) 6 th Decile (0.052) (0.053) * (0.052) ** (0.053) 7 th Decile (0.060) (0.062) (0.060) (0.062) 8 th Decile (0.070) (0.072) (0.070) (0.072) 9 th Decile (0.085) (0.087) (0.085) (0.087) Top Decile 0.166* (0.093) 0.177* (0.096) (0.093) (0.096) Top 5% Concentrated 0.235** (0.115) 0.276** (0.096) (0.114) (0.117) Top Bottom Decile 0.156* 0.162* (0.095) (0.098) Top Bottom 5% 0.213* 0.242** (0.117) (0.121) *** 1% significance; ** 5% significance; * 10% significance (0.095) (0.117) (0.098) 0.204* (0.120) 12
14 The ranking of the concentration deciles for the abnormal returns after expenses is very similar to the one before expenses. The difference in the performance between the most concentrated and diversified funds narrows slightly if we study after-expense returns, because highly concentrated funds charge higher expenses than diversified funds. For both the Fama- French three-factor and the Carhart four-factor measures, the after-expense abnormal return of the most concentrated decile exceeds that of the least concentrated decile by about 0.12% per month. However, this difference is statistically insignificant. B. Size Portfolios To further analyze whether the effect of the Industry Concentration Index depends on the size of mutual funds, we segregate the mutual funds into different size portfolios and compare the performance of concentrated and diversified funds for these various size portfolios. The distribution of the assets under management in our mutual funds sample is highly skewed to the right. Diseconomies of scale in money management, as discussed by Berk and Green (2004) and Chen, Hong, Huang, and Kubik (2004), make it difficult for very large funds to outperform passive benchmarks even if fund managers are skilled. We sort the mutual funds into different size portfolios and compare the performance of concentrated and diversified funds within these size portfolios. Specifically, we first sort funds into size quintiles based on their TNAs at the beginning of each month. Mutual funds in the first quintile manage on average $19 million, while funds in the fifth quintile manage on average $2,816 million. Subsequently, we sort the mutual funds within each size quintile into ten equalsized groups according to their Industry Concentration Index. 13
15 Table 4 Concentration Effect Conditional on Fund Size. Funds are sorted into five equally-sized portfolios according to their beginning-of-month TNA. Funds in each of these size portfolios are further divided into deciles according to the lagged Industry Concentration Index. The Industry Concentration Index is defined as ICI = (w F,i w M,i ) 2, where w F,i is the weight of the mutual fund holdings in industry i and w M,i is the weight of the market in industry i. The returns are expressed at a monthly frequency and the portfolios are rebalanced monthly. The abnormal returns before expenses using the Carhart (1997) four-factor model are summarized for different portfolios of mutual funds for the period of 1984 to The standard errors of the regressions are given in parentheses. The table includes the differences in the abnormal returns along with their standard errors between the top and the bottom deciles. Abnormal Return (in % per month) Smallest Quintile 2 nd Quintile 3 rd Quintile 4 th Quintile Largest Quintile Average TNA ,816 (in Millions) Average ICI (in %) Range of Average Decile ICI (in %) All Funds (0.056) (0.054) (0.052) (0.048) (0.037) Diversified Decile (0.044) (0.039) (0.035) (0.032) 0.055* (0.030) 2 nd Decile (0.053) (0.042) (0.048) (0.046) (0.033) 3 rd Decile (0.054) (0.054) (0.059) (0.049) (0.037) 4 th Decile (0.062) (0.064) (0.076) (0.052) (0.045) 5 th Decile (0.068) (0.066) (0.066) (0.059) (0.049) 6 th Decile (0.076) (0.067) (0.078) * (0.061) * (0.047) 7 th Decile (0.105) (0.087) (0.081) (0.068) (0.058) 8 th Decile (0.101) (0.093) (0.086) (0.078) (0.073) 9 th Decile (0.106) (0.112) (0.096) (0.113) (0.079) Concentrated 0.357*** 0.260** 0.217* Decile (0.129) (0.116) (0.130) Concentrated 0.356*** 0.253** Diversified (0.135) (0.116) (0.134) *** 1% significance; ** 5% significance; * 10% significance (0.105) (0.108) (0.111) (0.114) 14
16 Our findings, reported in Table 4, confirm the results in Chen, Hong, Huang, and Kubik (2004) that small mutual funds outperform large funds. Specifically, mutual funds in the small size quintile exhibit an abnormal return before expenses of 0.076% per month using the fourfactor model, while funds in the large size quintile an abnormal return of % per month. Table 4 focuses primarily on the effects of the Industry Concentration Index on abnormal performance within the size quintiles. We observe a positive performance difference between the most and the least concentrated funds in three size quintiles using the four-factor measure. However, the performance difference is significant at the 5% level only for the first two quintiles. For the top two quintiles, we do not see an economically significant concentration effect. The findings indicate that the concentration effect is more significant for smaller funds. This is not necessarily surprising in light of the studies by Berk and Green (2004) and Chen, Hong, Huang, and Kubik (2004), which suggest that larger funds usually suffer from significant diseconomies of scale. If concentrated funds have superior information then we should expect to see this effect more among smaller funds. Large funds, on average, are also less concentrated, which is not surprising given that it is more difficult for them to allocate their flows among few industries without exerting market impact on the stockholdings prices. Hence, we observe a smaller dispersion in concentration among the very large funds and thus the performance effect becomes smaller. We conclude that the aggregate concentration effect, though economically significant using an equal-weighted basis, is more pervasive among funds with a lower dollar value of funds under management. 15
17 C. Style Portfolios Funds frequently concentrate their holdings in specific investment styles, for example, value versus growth or small versus large capitalization stocks. In this section, we investigate to what extent our concentration results are related to funds investment styles. We sort our sample of mutual funds into four investment styles based on the characteristics of their stockholdings. Next, we assign each stock traded on the major U.S. exchanges into respective quintiles according to its market value and its book-to-market ratio. Subsequently, using the quintile information, we compute the value-weighted size score and value score for each mutual fund in each month. For example, a mutual fund that invests only in stocks in the smallest size quintile would have a size score of 1, while a mutual fund that invests only in the largest size quintile would have a size score of 5. We then group all mutual funds according to their size scores and value scores into four portfolios. The small-growth portfolio includes mutual funds with below median size scores and below median value scores. Similarly, we define the large-growth, smallvalue, and large-value portfolios. Finally, we subdivide each of these four portfolios into deciles according to their Industry Concentration Index. Table 5 summarizes the four-factor abnormal returns before expenses of these mutual funds portfolios. Consistent with the findings in DGTW and Chen, Jegadeesh, and Wermers (2000), we observe that mutual funds investing primarily in growth stocks outperform mutual funds investing in value stocks. Specifically, mutual funds focusing on large-growth stocks outperform mutual funds specializing in large-value stocks by about 0.03% per month. 16
18 Table 5 Concentration Effect Conditional on Fund Style. Funds are sorted at the beginning of each period into four portfolios according to the lagged market values (small versus large cap) and the lagged book-to-market ratios (growth versus value) of their holdings. Funds in each of these style portfolios are further divided into deciles according to the lagged Industry Concentration Index. The Industry Concentration Index is defined as ICI = (w F,i w M,i ) 2, where w F,i is the weight of the mutual fund holdings in industry i and w M,i is the weight of the market in industry i. The returns are expressed at a monthly frequency and the portfolios are rebalanced monthly. The abnormal returns before expenses using the Carhart (1997) four-factor model are summarized for different portfolios of mutual funds for the period of 1984 to The standard errors of the regressions are given in parentheses. The table includes the differences in the abnormal returns along with their standard errors between the top and the bottom deciles. Abnormal Return (in % per month) Small Growth Small Value Large Growth Large Value Average ICI (in %) Range of Average Decile ICI (in %) All Funds (0.081) (0.064) (0.044) (0.042) Diversified Decile (0.072) (0.059) (0.038) 0.048* (0.028) 2 nd Decile (0.078) (0.064) (0.043) (0.032) 3 rd Decile (0.081) (0.068) (0.048) (0.034) 4 th Decile (0.081) (0.071) (0.057) (0.043) 5 th Decile (0.090) 0.151** (0.076) (0.052) (0.049) 6 th Decile (0.086) (0.080) (0.060) (0.060) 7 th Decile (0.095) (0.086) (0.058) (0.059) 8 th Decile (0.109) (0.088) (0.060) (0.071) 9 th Decile (0.119) (0.101) (0.075) (0.076) Concentrated Decile * (0.140) (0.100) Concentrated 0.273** 0.194** Diversified (0.134) (0.097) *** 1% significance; ** 5% significance; * 10% significance (0.107) (0.114) (0.074) (0.073) 17
19 Consistent with our earlier findings, mutual funds with a higher industry concentration tend to generate higher abnormal returns before expenses within style categories, unless they specialize in large-value stocks. Nevertheless, the effect is only statistically significant for smallgrowth and small-value funds. The least concentrated decile of small-growth mutual funds has an abnormal return before expenses of % per month, while the most concentrated decile has an abnormal return of 0.196% per month. On the other hand, the least concentrated decile of large-value mutual funds has an abnormal return before expenses of 0.048% per month, while the most concentrated decile has an abnormal return of 0.038% per month. 4 Conclusions Mutual fund managers may deviate from the passive market portfolio by concentrating their holdings in specific industries. We investigate whether mutual fund managers hold concentrated portfolios because they have investment skills that are linked to specific industries. Using U.S. mutual fund data from 1984 to 2003, we find that mutual funds differ substantially in their industry concentration and that concentrated funds tend to follow distinct investment styles. In particular, managers of more concentrated funds overweigh growth and small stocks, whereas managers of more diversified funds hold portfolios that closely resemble the total market portfolio. We find that funds with most concentrated portfolios perform better than funds with diversified portfolios. This finding is robust to various risk-adjusted performance measures, including the commonly used four-factor model of Carhart (1997). In summary, this paper finds that investment ability is more evident among managers who hold portfolios concentrated in a few industries. The evidence lends support to the value of active fund management. 18
20 Appendix A: Industry Classification Industry Classification: This table describes the detailed composition of the ten industries used in calculating the ICI index. 10-Industry Classification 48-Industry French Classification 1. Consumer Non-Durables 1. Agriculture 2. Food Products 3. Candy and Soda 4. Beer and Liquor 5. Tobacco Products 7. Entertainment 8. Printing and Publishing 10. Apparel 16. Textiles 33. Personal Services 2. Consumer Durables 6. Toys 9. Consumer Goods 23. Automobiles and Trucks 3. Healthcare 11. Healthcare 12. Medical Equipment 13. Pharmaceutical Products 4. Manufacturing 14. Chemicals 15. Rubber and Plastic Products 17. Construction Materials 18. Construction 19. Steel Works 20. Fabricated Products 21. Machinery 22. Electrical Equipment 24. Aircraft 25. Shipbuilding and Railroad Equip. 26. Defense 38. Business Supplies 39. Shipping Containers 40. Transportation 48. Miscellaneous 5. Energy 27. Precious Metals 28. Mining 29. Coal 30. Oil 6. Utilities 31. Utilities 7. Telecom 32. Communications 8. Business Equipment and Services 34. Business Services 35. Computers 36. Electronic Equipment 37. Measuring and Control Equip. 9. Wholesale and Retail 41. Wholesale 42. Retail 43. Restaurants, Hotels, and Motels 10. Finance 44. Banking 45. Insurance 46. Real Estate 47. Trading 19
21 References Berk, J. and Green, R. C. (2004). Mutual fund flows and performance in rational markets. Journal of Political Economy 112(6), Carhart, M. M. (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance 52, Chevalier, J. and Ellison, G. (1997). Risk taking by mutual funds as a response to incentives. Journal of Political Economy 105, Chen, H. L., Jegadeesh, N., and Wermers, R. (2000). An examination of the stockholdings and trades of fund managers. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 35, Chen, J., Hong, H., Huang, M., and Kubik, J. (2004). Does fund size erode performance? Liquidity, organizational diseconomies and active money management. American Economic Review 94(5), Cohen, R., Coval, J. D., and Pástor, L. (2005). Judging fund managers by the company that they keep. Journal of Finance 60, Coval, J. D. and Moskowitz, T. J. (1999). Home bias at home: Local equity preference in domestic portfolios. Journal of Finance 54, Coval, J. D. and Moskowitz, T. J. (2001). The geography of investment: Informed trading and asset prices. Journal of Political Economy 109 (4), Daniel, K., Grinblatt, M., Titman, S., and Wermers, R. (1997). Measuring mutual fund performance with characteristic-based benchmarks. Journal of Finance 52, Fama, E. F. and French, K. R. (1993). Common risk factors in the return on bonds and stocks. Journal of Financial Economics 33, Grinblatt, M. and Titman, S. (1989). Mutual fund performance: An analysis of quarterly portfolio holdings. Journal of Business 62, Gruber, M. J. (1996). Another puzzle: The growth in actively managed mutual funds. Journal of Finance 51, Ippolito, R. A. (1992). Consumer reaction to measures of poor quality: Evidence from the mutual fund industry. Journal of Law and Economics 35, Jensen, M. C. (1968). The performance of mutual funds in the period Journal of Finance 23, Kacperczyk, M. and Seru, A. (2005). Fund manager use of public information: New evidence on managerial skills. Journal of Finance, forthcoming. Kacperczyk, M., Sialm, C., and Zheng, L. (2005). On the industry concentration of actively managed equity mutual funds. Journal of Finance 60, Levy, A. and Livingston, M. (1995). The gains from diversification reconsidered: Transaction costs and superior information. Financial Markets, Institutions, and Instruments 4(3), Mamaysky, H., Spiegel, M., and Zhang, H. (2005). Improved forecasting of mutual fund alphas and betas. Working paper, Yale University. Moskowitz, T. J. and Grinblatt, M. (1999). Do industries explain momentum? Journal of Finance 54, Nanda, V., Wang, Z., and Zheng, L. (2004). Family values and the star phenomenon. Review of Financial Studies 17 (3), Van Nieuwerburgh, S. and Veldkamp, L. (2005). Information acquisition and portfolio underdiversification. Working paper, New York University. Wermers, R. (2000). Mutual fund performance: An empirical decomposition into stock-picking talent, style, transaction costs, and expenses. Journal of Finance 55,
22 Zheng, L. (1999). Is money smart? A study of mutual fund investors fund selection ability. Journal of Finance 54,
Behind the Scenes of Mutual Fund Alpha
Behind the Scenes of Mutual Fund Alpha Qiang Bu Penn State University-Harrisburg This study examines whether fund alpha exists and whether it comes from manager skill. We found that the probability and
More informationStyle Dispersion and Mutual Fund Performance
Style Dispersion and Mutual Fund Performance Jiang Luo Zheng Qiao November 29, 2012 Abstract We estimate investment style dispersions for individual actively managed equity mutual funds, which describe
More informationIdentifying Skilled Mutual Fund Managers by their Ability to Forecast Earnings
Identifying Skilled Mutual Fund Managers by their Ability to Forecast Earnings Hao Jiang and Lu Zheng November 2012 ABSTRACT This paper proposes a new measure, the Ability to Forecast Earnings (AFE), to
More informationMUTUAL FUND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS PRE AND POST FINANCIAL CRISIS OF 2008
MUTUAL FUND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS PRE AND POST FINANCIAL CRISIS OF 2008 by Asadov, Elvin Bachelor of Science in International Economics, Management and Finance, 2015 and Dinger, Tim Bachelor of Business
More informationNBER WORKING PAPER SERIES UNOBSERVED ACTIONS OF MUTUAL FUNDS. Marcin Kacperczyk Clemens Sialm Lu Zheng
NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES UNOBSERVED ACTIONS OF MUTUAL FUNDS Marcin Kacperczyk Clemens Sialm Lu Zheng Working Paper 11766 http://www.nber.org/papers/w11766 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts
More informationMonthly Holdings Data and the Selection of Superior Mutual Funds + Edwin J. Elton* Martin J. Gruber*
Monthly Holdings Data and the Selection of Superior Mutual Funds + Edwin J. Elton* (eelton@stern.nyu.edu) Martin J. Gruber* (mgruber@stern.nyu.edu) Christopher R. Blake** (cblake@fordham.edu) July 2, 2007
More informationHigher Moment Gaps in Mutual Funds
Higher Moment Gaps in Mutual Funds Yun Ling Abstract Mutual fund returns are affected by both unobserved actions of fund managers and tail risks of fund returns. This empirical exercise reviews the return
More informationIndustry Momentum and Mutual Fund Performance
Industry Momentum and Mutual Fund Performance Jun Wu September 2015 Abstract This paper argues that the abnormal returns of industry-concentrated mutual funds are significantly contributed by industry
More informationMutual Fund s R 2 as Predictor of Performance
Mutual Fund s R 2 as Predictor of Performance By Yakov Amihud * and Ruslan Goyenko ** Abstract: We propose that fund performance is predicted by its R 2, obtained by regressing its return on the Fama-French-Carhart
More informationWhen Equity Mutual Fund Diversification Is Too Much. Svetoslav Covachev *
When Equity Mutual Fund Diversification Is Too Much Svetoslav Covachev * Abstract I study the marginal benefit of adding new stocks to the investment portfolios of active US equity mutual funds. Pollet
More informationIs Investor Rationality Time Varying? Evidence from the Mutual Fund Industry
Is Investor Rationality Time Varying? Evidence from the Mutual Fund Industry Vincent Glode, Burton Hollifield, Marcin Kacperczyk, and Shimon Kogan August 11, 2010 Glode is at the Wharton School, University
More informationDiversification and Mutual Fund Performance
Diversification and Mutual Fund Performance Hoon Cho * and SangJin Park April 21, 2017 ABSTRACT A common belief about fund managers with superior performance is that they are more likely to succeed in
More informationManagement Science Online Appendix Tables: Hiring Cheerleaders: Board Appointments of "Independent" Directors
Management Science Online Appendix Tables: Hiring Cheerleaders: Board Appointments of "Independent" Directors Table A1: Summary Statistics This table shows summary statistics for the sample of sell side
More informationSector Fund Performance
Sector Fund Performance Ashish TIWARI and Anand M. VIJH Henry B. Tippie College of Business University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242-1000 ABSTRACT Sector funds have grown into a nearly quarter-trillion
More informationPersistence in Mutual Fund Performance: Analysis of Holdings Returns
Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance: Analysis of Holdings Returns Samuel Kruger * June 2007 Abstract: Do mutual funds that performed well in the past select stocks that perform well in the future? I
More informationUlaş ÜNLÜ Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting and Finance, Nevsehir University, Nevsehir / Turkey.
Size, Book to Market Ratio and Momentum Strategies: Evidence from Istanbul Stock Exchange Ersan ERSOY* Assistant Professor, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business Administration,
More informationDoes fund size erode mutual fund performance?
Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam Does fund size erode mutual fund performance? An estimation of the relationship between fund size and fund performance In this paper I try to find
More informationHistorical Performance and characteristic of Mutual Fund
Historical Performance and characteristic of Mutual Fund Wisudanto Sri Maemunah Soeharto Mufida Kisti Department Management Faculties Economy and Business Airlangga University Wisudanto@feb.unair.ac.id
More informationOn Market Timing, Stock Picking, and Managerial Skills of Mutual Fund Managers with Manipulation-proof Performance Measure
On Market Timing, Stock Picking, and Managerial Skills of Mutual Fund Managers with Manipulation-proof Performance Measure Meifen Qian, Ping-Wen Sun, and Bin Yu International Institute for Financial Studies
More informationModern Fool s Gold: Alpha in Recessions
T H E J O U R N A L O F THEORY & PRACTICE FOR FUND MANAGERS FALL 2012 Volume 21 Number 3 Modern Fool s Gold: Alpha in Recessions SHAUN A. PFEIFFER AND HAROLD R. EVENSKY The Voices of Influence iijournals.com
More informationActive Management in Real Estate Mutual Funds
Active Management in Real Estate Mutual Funds Viktoriya Lantushenko and Edward Nelling 1 September 4, 2017 1 Edward Nelling, Professor of Finance, Department of Finance, Drexel University, email: nelling@drexel.edu,
More informationThe Value Premium and the January Effect
The Value Premium and the January Effect Julia Chou, Praveen Kumar Das * Current Version: January 2010 * Chou is from College of Business Administration, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199;
More informationWhen Opportunity Knocks: Cross-Sectional Return Dispersion and Active Fund Performance
When Opportunity Knocks: Cross-Sectional Return Dispersion and Active Fund Performance Anna von Reibnitz * Australian National University September 2014 Abstract Active opportunity in the market, measured
More informationAn Assessment of Managerial Skill based on Cross-Sectional Mutual Fund Performance
An Assessment of Managerial Skill based on Cross-Sectional Mutual Fund Performance Ilhan Demiralp Price College of Business, University of Oklahoma 307 West Brooks St., Norman, OK 73019, USA Tel.: (405)
More informationRisk Taking and Performance of Bond Mutual Funds
Risk Taking and Performance of Bond Mutual Funds Lilian Ng, Crystal X. Wang, and Qinghai Wang This Version: March 2015 Ng is from the Schulich School of Business, York University, Canada; Wang and Wang
More informationDoes Fund Size Erode Performance? Liquidity, Organizational Diseconomies and Active Money Management. Joseph Chen University of Southern California
Does Fund Size Erode Performance? Liquidity, Organizational Diseconomies and Active Money Management Joseph Chen University of Southern California Harrison Hong Stanford University and Princeton University
More informationAlternative Benchmarks for Evaluating Mutual Fund Performance
2010 V38 1: pp. 121 154 DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6229.2009.00253.x REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS Alternative Benchmarks for Evaluating Mutual Fund Performance Jay C. Hartzell, Tobias Mühlhofer and Sheridan D. Titman
More informationFund Managers Who Take Big Bets: Skilled or Overconfident
Fund Managers Who Take Big Bets: Skilled or Overconfident Klaas P. Baks, Jeffrey A. Busse, and T. Clifton Green * March 2006 Abstract We document a positive relation between mutual fund performance and
More informationSharpening Mutual Fund Alpha
Sharpening Mutual Fund Alpha Bing Han 1 Chloe Chunliu Yang 2 Abstract We study whether mutual fund managers intentionally adopt negatively skewed strategies to generate superior performance. Using the
More informationOn the Concentration of Mutual Fund Portfolio Holdings - Skills or Overconfidence?
On the Concentn of Mutual Fund Portfolio Holdings - Skills or Overconfidence? Yun-Ju Lai XiaoHua Chen Abstract This paper tests the alternative hypotheses of investment selection skills versus overconfidence
More informationHave Mutual Funds Lost Their Information Advantage? Reversal of Returns to Mutual Fund Trades..
Have Mutual Funds Lost Their Information Advantage? Reversal of Returns to Mutual Fund Trades.. Teodor Dyakov Hao Jiang Marno Verbeek January 10, 2014 Faculty of Economics and Business Administration,
More informationA Matter of Style: The Causes and Consequences of Style Drift in Institutional Portfolios
A Matter of Style: The Causes and Consequences of Style Drift in Institutional Portfolios Russ Wermers Department of Finance Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland at College Park College
More informationReturns on Small Cap Growth Stocks, or the Lack Thereof: What Risk Factor Exposures Can Tell Us
RESEARCH Returns on Small Cap Growth Stocks, or the Lack Thereof: What Risk Factor Exposures Can Tell Us The small cap growth space has been noted for its underperformance relative to other investment
More informationAre Firms in Boring Industries Worth Less?
Are Firms in Boring Industries Worth Less? Jia Chen, Kewei Hou, and René M. Stulz* January 2015 Abstract Using theories from the behavioral finance literature to predict that investors are attracted to
More informationRevisiting Idiosyncratic Volatility and Stock Returns. Fatma Sonmez 1
Revisiting Idiosyncratic Volatility and Stock Returns Fatma Sonmez 1 Abstract This paper s aim is to revisit the relation between idiosyncratic volatility and future stock returns. There are three key
More informationHow to measure mutual fund performance: economic versus statistical relevance
Accounting and Finance 44 (2004) 203 222 How to measure mutual fund performance: economic versus statistical relevance Blackwell Oxford, ACFI Accounting 0810-5391 AFAANZ, 44 2ORIGINAL R. Otten, UK D. Publishing,
More informationNBER WORKING PAPER SERIES PORTFOLIO CONCENTRATION AND THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS. Zoran Ivković Clemens Sialm Scott Weisbenner
NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES PORTFOLIO CONCENTRATION AND THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS Zoran Ivković Clemens Sialm Scott Weisbenner Working Paper 10675 http://www.nber.org/papers/w10675 NATIONAL
More informationJanuary 12, Abstract. We identify a team approach in which the asset management company assembles
On the Team Approach to Mutual Fund Management: Observability, Incentives, and Performance Jiang Luo Zheng Qiao January 12, 2014 Abstract We identify a team approach in which the asset management company
More informationThe Effect of Fund Size on Performance:The Evidence from Active Equity Mutual Funds in Thailand
The Effect of Fund Size on Performance:The Evidence from Active Equity Mutual Funds in Thailand NopphonTangjitprom Martin de Tours School of Management and Economics, Assumption University, Hua Mak, Bangkok,
More informationCommon Holdings in Mutual Fund Family
Common Holdings in Mutual Fund Family Jean Chen, Li Xie, and Si Zhou This version: August 30, 2016 ABSTRACT This paper investigates common holding behavior across fund members as a consequence of information
More informationDouble Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance
Double Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance February 2016 ABSTRACT We develop a new approach for estimating mutual fund performance that controls for both factor model betas and stock characteristics in one
More informationForeign focused mutual funds and exchange traded funds: Do they improve portfolio management?
Foreign focused mutual funds and exchange traded funds: Do they improve portfolio management? D. Eli Sherrill a, Sara E. Shirley b, Jeffrey R. Stark c a College of Business Illinois State University Campus
More informationDiscussion Paper No. DP 07/02
SCHOOL OF ACCOUNTING, FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT Essex Finance Centre Can the Cross-Section Variation in Expected Stock Returns Explain Momentum George Bulkley University of Exeter Vivekanand Nawosah University
More informationThe evaluation of the performance of UK American unit trusts
International Review of Economics and Finance 8 (1999) 455 466 The evaluation of the performance of UK American unit trusts Jonathan Fletcher* Department of Finance and Accounting, Glasgow Caledonian University,
More informationDo Better Educated Mutual Fund Managers Outperform Their Peers?
Do Better Educated Mutual Fund Managers Outperform Their Peers? By P.F. van Laarhoven Tilburg University School of Economics and Management Supervisor: A. Manconi Master s program in Finance 22-08-2014
More informationThe Effect of Kurtosis on the Cross-Section of Stock Returns
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2012 The Effect of Kurtosis on the Cross-Section of Stock Returns Abdullah Al Masud Utah State University
More informationDecimalization and Illiquidity Premiums: An Extended Analysis
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2015 Decimalization and Illiquidity Premiums: An Extended Analysis Seth E. Williams Utah State University
More informationBayesian Alphas and Mutual Fund Persistence. Jeffrey A. Busse. Paul J. Irvine * February Abstract
Bayesian Alphas and Mutual Fund Persistence Jeffrey A. Busse Paul J. Irvine * February 00 Abstract Using daily returns, we find that Bayesian alphas predict future mutual fund Sharpe ratios significantly
More informationAn analysis of momentum and contrarian strategies using an optimal orthogonal portfolio approach
An analysis of momentum and contrarian strategies using an optimal orthogonal portfolio approach Hossein Asgharian and Björn Hansson Department of Economics, Lund University Box 7082 S-22007 Lund, Sweden
More informationA Lottery Demand-Based Explanation of the Beta Anomaly. Online Appendix
A Lottery Demand-Based Explanation of the Beta Anomaly Online Appendix Section I provides details of the calculation of the variables used in the paper. Section II examines the robustness of the beta anomaly.
More informationPerformance Attribution: Are Sector Fund Managers Superior Stock Selectors?
Performance Attribution: Are Sector Fund Managers Superior Stock Selectors? Nicholas Scala December 2010 Abstract: Do equity sector fund managers outperform diversified equity fund managers? This paper
More informationFurther Evidence on the Performance of Funds of Funds: The Case of Real Estate Mutual Funds. Kevin C.H. Chiang*
Further Evidence on the Performance of Funds of Funds: The Case of Real Estate Mutual Funds Kevin C.H. Chiang* School of Management University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks, AK 99775 Kirill Kozhevnikov
More informationPerformance-Chasing Behavior in Mutual Funds: New Evidence from Multi-Fund Managers
Performance-Chasing Behavior in Mutual Funds: New Evidence from Multi-Fund Managers Darwin Choi, HKUST C. Bige Kahraman, SIFR and Stockholm School of Economics Abhiroop Mukherjee, HKUST* August 2012 Abstract
More informationReturn Reversals, Idiosyncratic Risk and Expected Returns
Return Reversals, Idiosyncratic Risk and Expected Returns Wei Huang, Qianqiu Liu, S.Ghon Rhee and Liang Zhang Shidler College of Business University of Hawaii at Manoa 2404 Maile Way Honolulu, Hawaii,
More informationEssays on Open-Ended on Equity Mutual Funds in Thailand
Essays on Open-Ended on Equity Mutual Funds in Thailand Roongkiat Ratanabanchuen and Kanis Saengchote* Chulalongkorn Business School ABSTRACT Mutual funds provide a convenient and well-diversified option
More informationDoes MAX Matter for Mutual Funds? *
Does MAX Matter for Mutual Funds? * Bradley A. Goldie Miami University Tyler R. Henry Miami University Haim Kassa Miami University, and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission This Draft: March 19, 2018
More informationRisk-managed 52-week high industry momentum, momentum crashes, and hedging macroeconomic risk
Risk-managed 52-week high industry momentum, momentum crashes, and hedging macroeconomic risk Klaus Grobys¹ This draft: January 23, 2017 Abstract This is the first study that investigates the profitability
More informationPortfolio performance and environmental risk
Portfolio performance and environmental risk Rickard Olsson 1 Umeå School of Business Umeå University SE-90187, Sweden Email: rickard.olsson@usbe.umu.se Sustainable Investment Research Platform Working
More informationYale ICF Working Paper No February 2002 DO WINNERS REPEAT WITH STYLE?
Yale ICF Working Paper No. 00-70 February 2002 DO WINNERS REPEAT WITH STYLE? Roger G. Ibbotson Yale School of Mangement Amita K. Patel Ibbotson Associates This paper can be downloaded without charge from
More informationThe ABCs of Mutual Funds: A Natural Experiment on Fund Flows and Performance
The ABCs of Mutual Funds: A Natural Experiment on Fund Flows and Performance Vikram Nanda University of Michigan Business School Z. Jay Wang University of Michigan Business School Lu Zheng University of
More informationUnderreaction, Trading Volume, and Momentum Profits in Taiwan Stock Market
Underreaction, Trading Volume, and Momentum Profits in Taiwan Stock Market Mei-Chen Lin * Abstract This paper uses a very short period to reexamine the momentum effect in Taiwan stock market, focusing
More informationPROFITABILITY OF CAPM MOMENTUM STRATEGIES IN THE US STOCK MARKET
International Journal of Business and Society, Vol. 18 No. 2, 2017, 347-362 PROFITABILITY OF CAPM MOMENTUM STRATEGIES IN THE US STOCK MARKET Terence Tai-Leung Chong The Chinese University of Hong Kong
More informationDynamic Factor Timing and the Predictability of Actively Managed Mutual Fund Returns
Dynamic Factor Timing and the Predictability of Actively Managed Mutual Fund Returns PRELIMINARY AND INCOMPLETE. PLEASE DO NOT CITE OR CIRCULATE WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE AUTHORS. Jason C. Hsu Research
More informationMutual Fund s R 2 as Predictor of Performance
Mutual Fund s R 2 as Predictor of Performance By Yakov Amihud * and Ruslan Goyenko ** Abstract: We propose that fund performance can be predicted by its R 2, obtained by regressing its return on the multi-factor
More informationMutual Fund Performance. Eugene F. Fama and Kenneth R. French * Abstract
First draft: October 2007 This draft: August 2008 Not for quotation: Comments welcome Mutual Fund Performance Eugene F. Fama and Kenneth R. French * Abstract In aggregate, mutual funds produce a portfolio
More informationDouble Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance *
Double Adjusted Mutual Fund Performance * Jeffrey A. Busse Lei Jiang Yuehua Tang November 2014 ABSTRACT We develop a new approach for estimating mutual fund performance that controls for both factor model
More informationNew Zealand Mutual Fund Performance
New Zealand Mutual Fund Performance Rob Bauer ABP Investments and Maastricht University Limburg Institute of Financial Economics Maastricht University P.O. Box 616 6200 MD Maastricht The Netherlands Phone:
More informationThe Use of ETFs by Actively Managed Mutual Funds *
The Use of ETFs by Actively Managed Mutual Funds * D. Eli Sherrill Assistant Professor of Finance College of Business, Illinois State University desherr@ilstu.edu 309.438.3959 Sara E. Shirley Assistant
More informationTHE IMPACT OF QUANTITATIVE EASING MONETARY POLICY ON AMERICAN CORPORATE PERFORMANCE
IJER Serials Publications 12(5), 2015: 2043-2056 ISSN: 0972-9380 THE IMPACT OF QUANTITATIVE EASING MONETARY POLICY ON AMERICAN CORPORATE PERFORMANCE Abstract: We aim to identify whether the implementation
More informationThe Impact of Institutional Investors on the Monday Seasonal*
Su Han Chan Department of Finance, California State University-Fullerton Wai-Kin Leung Faculty of Business Administration, Chinese University of Hong Kong Ko Wang Department of Finance, California State
More informationAsian Economic and Financial Review THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT INCREASES AND STOCK RETURNS
Asian Economic and Financial Review ISSN(e): 2222-6737/ISSN(p): 2305-2147 journal homepage: http://www.aessweb.com/journals/5002 THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT INCREASES AND STOCK RETURNS Jung Fang Liu 1 --- Nicholas
More informationBENCHMARKING BENCHMARKS: MEASURING CHARACTERISTIC SELECTIVITY USING PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS DATA. Adrian D. Lee
BENCHMARKING BENCHMARKS: MEASURING CHARACTERISTIC SELECTIVITY USING PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS DATA Adrian D. Lee School of Banking and Finance Australian School of Business The University of New South Wales Phone:
More informationExcess Cash and Mutual Fund Performance
Excess Cash and Mutual Fund Performance Mikhail Simutin The University of British Columbia November 22, 2009 Abstract I document a positive relationship between excess cash holdings of actively managed
More informationManagerial Activeness and Mutual Fund Performance
Managerial Activeness and Mutual Fund Performance Hitesh Doshi University of Houston Redouane Elkamhi University of Toronto Mikhail Simutin University of Toronto A closet indexer is more likely to meet
More informationLiquidity skewness premium
Liquidity skewness premium Giho Jeong, Jangkoo Kang, and Kyung Yoon Kwon * Abstract Risk-averse investors may dislike decrease of liquidity rather than increase of liquidity, and thus there can be asymmetric
More informationInformation Acquisition, International Under-diversification and Portfolio Performance of Institutional Investors
Information Acquisition, International Under-diversification and Portfolio Performance of Institutional Investors Nicole Choi University of Wyoming nchoi@uwyo.edu Mark Fedenia University of Wisconsin-Madison
More informationReconcilable Differences: Momentum Trading by Institutions
Reconcilable Differences: Momentum Trading by Institutions Richard W. Sias * March 15, 2005 * Department of Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate, College of Business and Economics, Washington State University,
More informationLiquidity and IPO performance in the last decade
Liquidity and IPO performance in the last decade Saurav Roychoudhury Associate Professor School of Management and Leadership Capital University Abstract It is well documented by that if long run IPO underperformance
More informationTop Management Turnover: An Examination of Portfolio Holdings and Fund Performance*
Top Management Turnover: An Examination of Portfolio Holdings and Fund Performance* David R. Gallagher a Prashanthi Nadarajah a Matt Pinnuck b First Draft: 18 August 2003 Current Draft: 21 October 2004
More informationChanges in Analysts' Recommendations and Abnormal Returns. Qiming Sun. Bachelor of Commerce, University of Calgary, 2011.
Changes in Analysts' Recommendations and Abnormal Returns By Qiming Sun Bachelor of Commerce, University of Calgary, 2011 Yuhang Zhang Bachelor of Economics, Capital Unv of Econ and Bus, 2011 RESEARCH
More informationDoes Fund Size Matter?: An Analysis of Small and Large Bond Fund Performance
Does Fund Size Matter?: An Analysis of Small and Large Bond Fund Performance James Gallant Senior Honors Project April 23, 2007 I. Abstract Mutual funds have become a staple for retirement savings and
More informationPrice, Earnings, and Revenue Momentum Strategies
Price, Earnings, and Revenue Momentum Strategies Hong-Yi Chen Rutgers University, USA Sheng-Syan Chen National Taiwan University, Taiwan Chin-Wen Hsin Yuan Ze University, Taiwan Cheng-Few Lee Rutgers University,
More informationDiversified or Concentrated Factors What are the Investment Beliefs Behind these two Smart Beta Approaches?
Diversified or Concentrated Factors What are the Investment Beliefs Behind these two Smart Beta Approaches? Noël Amenc, PhD Professor of Finance, EDHEC Risk Institute CEO, ERI Scientific Beta Eric Shirbini,
More informationEmpirical Study on Market Value Balance Sheet (MVBS)
Empirical Study on Market Value Balance Sheet (MVBS) Yiqiao Yin Simon Business School November 2015 Abstract This paper presents the results of an empirical study on Market Value Balance Sheet (MVBS).
More informationThe Role of Industry Effect and Market States in Taiwanese Momentum
The Role of Industry Effect and Market States in Taiwanese Momentum Hsiao-Peng Fu 1 1 Department of Finance, Providence University, Taiwan, R.O.C. Correspondence: Hsiao-Peng Fu, Department of Finance,
More informationWhen Opportunity Knocks: Cross-Sectional Return Dispersion and Active Fund Performance
When Opportunity Knocks: Cross-Sectional Return Dispersion and Active Fund Performance Anna von Reibnitz * Australian National University 14 September 2015 Abstract Active opportunity in the market, measured
More information15 Week 5b Mutual Funds
15 Week 5b Mutual Funds 15.1 Background 1. It would be natural, and completely sensible, (and good marketing for MBA programs) if funds outperform darts! Pros outperform in any other field. 2. Except for...
More informationDoes Fund Size Erode Mutual Fund Performance? The Role of Liquidity and Organization. Joseph Chen University of Southern California
Does Fund Size Erode Mutual Fund Performance? The Role of Liquidity and Organization Joseph Chen University of Southern California Harrison Hong Princeton University Ming Huang Stanford University Jeffrey
More informationWhat Does Risk-Neutral Skewness Tell Us About Future Stock Returns? Supplementary Online Appendix
What Does Risk-Neutral Skewness Tell Us About Future Stock Returns? Supplementary Online Appendix 1 Tercile Portfolios The main body of the paper presents results from quintile RNS-sorted portfolios. Here,
More informationIs a Team Different From the Sum of Its Parts? Evidence from Mutual Fund Managers
Is a Team Different From the Sum of Its Parts? Evidence from Mutual Fund Managers Abstract This paper provides the first empirical test of the diversification of opinion theory and the group shift theory
More informationHuman Capital and the Structure of the Mutual Fund Industry
Human Capital and the Structure of the Mutual Fund Industry Si Cheng *, Massimo Massa, Matthew Spiegel, Hong Zhang September 6, 2012 Abstract Production functions necessarily play a significant role in
More informationSmart Beta #
Smart Beta This information is provided for registered investment advisors and institutional investors and is not intended for public use. Dimensional Fund Advisors LP is an investment advisor registered
More informationInvestment Performance of Common Stock in Relation to their Price-Earnings Ratios: BASU 1977 Extended Analysis
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 5-2015 Investment Performance of Common Stock in Relation to their Price-Earnings Ratios: BASU 1977 Extended
More informationConcentration and Stock Returns: Australian Evidence
2010 International Conference on Economics, Business and Management IPEDR vol.2 (2011) (2011) IAC S IT Press, Manila, Philippines Concentration and Stock Returns: Australian Evidence Katja Ignatieva Faculty
More informationFocused Funds How Do They Perform in Comparison with More Diversified Funds? A Study on Swedish Mutual Funds. Master Thesis NEKN
Focused Funds How Do They Perform in Comparison with More Diversified Funds? A Study on Swedish Mutual Funds Master Thesis NEKN01 2014-06-03 Supervisor: Birger Nilsson Author: Zakarias Bergstrand Table
More informationInternational Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, 2013 ISSN ( ) Vol-2, Issue 12
Momentum and industry-dependence: the case of Shanghai stock exchange market. Author Detail: Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, Liaoning, Dalian, China Salvio.Elias. Macha Abstract A number of
More informationSTRATEGY OVERVIEW. Long/Short Equity. Related Funds: 361 Domestic Long/Short Equity Fund (ADMZX) 361 Global Long/Short Equity Fund (AGAZX)
STRATEGY OVERVIEW Long/Short Equity Related Funds: 361 Domestic Long/Short Equity Fund (ADMZX) 361 Global Long/Short Equity Fund (AGAZX) Strategy Thesis The thesis driving 361 s Long/Short Equity strategies
More informationAppendix Tables for: A Flow-Based Explanation for Return Predictability. Dong Lou London School of Economics
Appendix Tables for: A Flow-Based Explanation for Return Predictability Dong Lou London School of Economics Table A1: A Horse Race between Two Definitions of This table reports Fama-MacBeth stocks regressions.
More informationONLINE APPENDIX. Do Individual Currency Traders Make Money?
ONLINE APPENDIX Do Individual Currency Traders Make Money? 5.7 Robustness Checks with Second Data Set The performance results from the main data set, presented in Panel B of Table 2, show that the top
More informationVOLUME 40 NUMBER 2 WINTER The Voices of Influence iijournals.com
VOLUME 40 NUMBER 2 www.iijpm.com WINTER 2014 The Voices of Influence iijournals.com Can Alpha Be Captured by Risk Premia? JENNIFER BENDER, P. BRETT HAMMOND, AND WILLIAM MOK JENNIFER BENDER is managing
More information